APHC010061962022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 4001/2022 Between: Chennupati Ravi Kumar & Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SUMANTH AMIRAPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M MANOHAR REDDY (SC FOR MUNC AND MUNC CORP ) 2. S PRANATHI 3. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.4001 of 2022 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the inaction of the Respondents in considering the Petitioners’ representations dated 02.03.2021 & 30.12.2021 and their inaction in withdrawing the proposal to lay the 80 feet road over the Petitioners’ vacant land situated in R.S.No.147/4B, Patamata even after the deletion of the 80 feet road proposed to pass through the New Postal Colony, Patamata and as reflected in the revised Master Plan, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri Sumanth Amirapu, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Sri A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.4-Corporation. 3. The case of the Petitioners in brief is that they are the absolute owners of the land admeasuring Ac.0.52 cents in R.S.No.147/4B, D.No.59A-21/3-5/1A, Ward No.31, ASST No.615023, Patamata, Vijayawada. As per the Master Plan initially prepared for the Vijayawada Town, 80 feet road was proposed to be laid through the Postal Colony, Patamata and another 80 feet road was proposed to run through the Petitioners’ land from West to East in order to give access to the 80 feet road that to be laid through the Postal Colony, Patamata. As per the Petitioners, the proposed 80 feet road would consume about 1207.02 Sq. Yards of the Petitioners’ land. Subsequently, the Master Plan was revised and 80 feet proposed road referred above was shelved. In spite of revision of Master Plan and shelving of the proposal of 80 feet road the same is being reflected in the Master Plan and the Petitioners’ right to use the land is hindered. 3 4. The Petitioners gave representations on 02.03.2021 & 30.12.2021 requesting the Respondent authorities to delete the proposed road from the Master Plan. As no action was initiated by the Respondent authorities on the representations said to have been made by the Petitioners, the present Writ Petition is filed. 5. The Respondent No.4-Corporation had filed their Counter Affidavit, wherein it was mentioned that the Director of Town and Country Planning had already revised the Master Plan in the year 2006 thereby permanently cancelling the proposal to lay the 80 feet road passing through Postal Colony, Patamata by virtue of power conferred under G.O.Ms.No.674, MA, dated 29.12.2006. The relevant Paragraphs of the Counter Affidavit are extracted below for clarity: “7. It is respectfully submitted that the Town Planning Authorities revised the Master Plan in the year 2006 thereby permanently cancelling the proposal to lay the 80 feet road passing through Postal Colony, Patamata by virtue of the powers conferred under G.O.Ms. No: 674, MA, Dt.29-12-2006. Since, the idea of laying the 80 feet road through the Postal Colony, Patamata being dropped, there was no necessity to expand the Anuradha Hospital Road to 80 feet beyond what it already is. And it erroneously reflected in the Master Plan to be connecting the 60 feet road. 8. It is respectfully submitted that, as a result of the deletion of the 80 feet road through the Postal Colony, Patamata, laying of the 80 feet road through the Anuradha Hospital Road to anything more than that already exist is futile as there is road beyond the Anuradha Hospital Road. 4 9. In view of the above, laying the 80 feet road through Anuradha Hospital Road is neither desirable nor beneficial to the public and it is proposed that the remaining part of the 80 feet road through the Anuradha Hospital Road be deleted and restored back to the status as the road was prior to the preparation of the erstwhile Master Plan.” 6. In view of the above, as there is no proposal to lay 80 feet road through the land of the Writ Petitioners, the grievance of the Petitioners is redressed and the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the Petitioners to submit applications before the concerned authorities for grant of building permission. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 25.03.2025 IS 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.4001 of 2022 Date: 25.03.2025 IS